[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1510302036140.17538@pobox.suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 20:40:32 +0100 (CET)
From: Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
cc: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] PM, vfs: use filesystem freezing instead of kthread
freezer
On Fri, 30 Oct 2015, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > I would say instead "no I/O is allowed from now on". Maybe that's an
> > overstatement, but I think it comes closer to the truth.
But that's what PM callbacks are for.
> Exactly. And I'm pretty sure hardware drivers do use kernel threads,
> and do I/O from them.
>
> LEDs are just one example
And why is that relevant? First, I don't see any freezable kthread in leds
class implementation whatsoever. Second, I am pretty sure that it's quite
unlikely to participate in filesystem I/O.
Sure, you need to suspend and resume the devices when going through
suspend. That's why led_suspend() exists. How would try_to_freeze() help
at all? That's basically just a fancy schedule() called at certain points.
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists